Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Once again, where is Shiong quoted as saying IPO? It is almost amuzing at this point how he always seems to swerve readers on this simple overlooked fact. Shiong stated he would "initiate a public offering" (I love the play on words) he did not say "initial Public Offering". A public offering could mean an IPO or RM. Even if there is indeed an IPO for NantHealth....what are the transactions Shiong has to take care of beforehand. I know...but i'm not telling.
If court docs containing second hand info is one's only basis for DD i'd say they will lose....lose the opportunity of a lifetime that is.
Actually, we are basing RM ideas on this http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1335294/000117120011000229/i00114_ex99.htm the fact that a mere 9 months before Keyon filing a 15-12G, Dr. Shiong allowed for this conversion of debt making him KEYO's largest shareholder. As a result, Dr. Shiong is the custodian of the KEYO shell. Shiong has never sold it, like he did with another shell (RPTN Raptor Networks) he once owned. For experienced shell/reverse merger traders I do not have to state the obvious rarity in an empty shell being held by a billionaire (getting ready to launch a conglomerate of biotech data companies). In fact, some would call it a complete no-brainer. The type of play that dreams are made of. As far as the link provided in your post, it is the same old second-hand information as (many) times before. Relying upon statements made by plaintiffs in a court document. Most here know the concept of statements that are a matter of conjecture. As long as it is not the main matter of complaint that is the focus for the lawsuit, presumptive statements such as this can be made in a lawsuit filing. So, as your link points out, why did'nt Shiong pay the "drop in the bucket" sum of $2M when it could effect a $4B IPO? Answer: because it will not be an IPO.....an RM does not have the short window of time to raise the money that an IPO does and is not subject to the same market fluctuations. So....basing IPO ideas on second hand info from bitter, blackmailing plaintiffs in a frivolous lawsuit filing? "Good luck with that." LOLOLOL
I am always happy to read any intelligent DD posted by those on this board. "So many words".....LOL. Sometimes good DD requires reading all of the words, and interpreting them. It makes all the difference in stocks like KEYO, where the info is not all in front of us.
"Going Public" can mean anything... IPO mean IPO". Awesome! I'm glad we are in agreement. Dr. Shiong has always been quoted as saying "going public" which can mean anything including reverse merger. NEVER has Shiong specifically been quoted as saying IPO, rather it is always conjecture by a second party, such as the editor writing the article or the plaintiff's wording in drafting a legal document. Thanks gain, very enlightening.
Baron Rothschild "The time to buy is when there's blood in the streets". Yes, prices are a signaling device. Basing a long term play on investor sentiment is why money changes hands from the impatient to the patient in the stock market. Investor sentiment does not change the end game of a company with the long term prospects of ADMD! "ADMD never submitted a de novo application"! LOL http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/advanced-medical-isotope-corporation-files-a-de-novo-submission-for-y-90-radiogeltm-device-300013648.html do you know the legal repercussions of stating false information in an official PR? Let's get real.
I do not know exactly what Les said about a 1 yr time frame...or from where it came, but there is no time limit for an owner of a dormant shell that wants to RM. Shells have been dormant for years before they came to life again.
"Yet no one can dilettante why this case why this case is actually frivolous, just makes assumptions". LOL you answered your own question in this post. "Furthermore why is no one suing the TA, the ones that actually made the mistake"? "Instead they are suing the ones responsible for the payment not the illegal share issues". The fact is, there were 187,918,556 more shares of common stock than if AMIC had issued those shares at Par Value. The excess share value was $187,918.56 in which the plaintiffs received an illegal windfall on a conversion payment. Now the plaintiff wants to act as if that never happened and continue to receive their allotted payments due. AMIC has simply wants the excess shares to be returned for cancellation (because plaintiff was paid beyond the allotted amount due) or to cancel the note and return AMIC additional 51,357,556 shares. The transfer agent will straighten this out. The plaintiff is insane....AMIC should be the one's suing them. It's like me owing you $10K and I am making payments of $500 a month....but my bank accidentally pays you $3K on one of your payment transactions. I then tell you I will not pay anymore until you return the excess $2500 or cancel the $10K I owe you altogether. Then you sue me. This will be straightened out. Like I said, it's not a big deal. AMIC will prevail here and most likely a deal will be hashed out in court.
Most biotechs are heavy in debt and with FDA approval and product rollout experience huge turnarounds. If you can't handle that, don't invest.
In the scheme of things, yes.....plaintiff doesn't have a case.
Tcsxyz.....did your golf buddy tell you that? This lawsuit amounts to a hill of beans....a small dispute involving a small amount of money and convertible shares. Does nothing to effect the long term outcome or success of this stock.
I had to "chuckle" at you and your golf partner's terrible DD.....because it is both "sad, and funny". This is the CFO of Advanced Medical Isotope Corp's LinkedIn profile https://www.linkedin.com/in/brucejolliff AMIC is CLEARLY listed as his current position. WOW.
I agree. Posts that have no insight to how an RM works and include no DD are "really just laughable". Understand, the NOLs are not the only incentive to doing a reverse merger. All of the value of the new company (NantWorks) is merged into the empty shell (hence the tem reverse merger, the shell is just an empty vessel which the company uses to gain access to trading on the public markets quickly). With the convertible preferred shares Shiong owns x value of new company = do the math. THAT is the incentive. NOLs are icing on the cake. Shiong can make billions doing an RM here. We on IHUB are a small faction along for the ride. Plus, there is no "baggage" with KEYO. The old company was dissolved (your own posts have stated this, remember)? Shiong was KEYO's biggest creditor. This is the reason KEYO was dissolved, to free them of al liens and legal encumbrances. They are now free to become a new company.
There are reverse merger plans for KEYO. Soon you'll know....but it will be TOO LATE. "Nice drop again today".....most reverse merger/shell players that are in for the long term pay no mind to the PPS every minute of every day, we expect the PPS will have some up and down swings, especially on low volume. Most experienced players know this. Thanks for the report though LOL.
"Like when everything says IPO".....yeah, everything except Dr. Shiong. Shiong has never been quoted as saying IPO, has he? Don't give me the so-called fact check that has never been printed or that there is no proof of. In all actuality, only two things stated IPO, a Forbes article (editor embellishment, word IPO was stated by the writer of the article and not Shiong) and any articles saying IPO since that time were re-quoting the Forbes article! Then the frivolous lawsuit in which IPO was the plaintiffs own words....their own assumption that going public meant that the company was preparing for IPO, when in fact it was not. However, KEYO might just be a duck.....because SOON, we'll all be counting our bills. Cha ching.
Yet tomorrow is June 1...and still no "magical miracle" S1 filing or IPO prospectus filed. That is what i'd be worried about. A reverse merger can take place at any time.....an IPO takes many months after an S1 filing/prospectus. The company said they'd be "going public" earlier this year. They don't have too much time left if they are going to IPO this year. :)
Next time try posting the whole thing: Defendents hired Plaintiffs to assist in legitimizing the products and platforms being offered by the defendents and to ensure a smooth transition to becoming a public corporation through their IPO. They were computer software techs/troubleshooting analysts. This is pretty straightforward for most to comprehend. The plaintiffs were working on the network infrastructure to basically ensure everything was in working order as the company was preparing to go public (through what they perceived would be an IPO). They were not working directly on an IPO. Since when do companies hire computer techs to help them in becoming publicly traded corporations? LOL
They were not hired or "included in preparing an IPO"! Read your own link! Their job occupations had NOTHING to do with preparing for an IPO. Also.....concerning insider trading.....announcing the intent to do an IPO prior to executing it is not insider trading. When the IPO takes place, everyone has the same opportunity to buy shares on the given IPO date. Announcing the intent to do a reverse merger prior to executing it IS INSIDER TRADING because some individuals who heard the announcement would have a chance to buy shares before others. THIS IS NOT A DIFFICULT CONCEPT TO GRASP. It's been explained how many times on this board now? LOLOLOLOLOL.
When most people hear that a company intends to "go public".....they immediately think IPO. If you asked 10 people what "going public" means, at least 7 would probably say "IPO". The majority of common people do not know what a reverse merger is or how it relates to going public. Which is what we have here....these employees (plaintiffs) most likely heard that the company was going public and thought "IPO". It was conjecture. Like the ONE Forbes article. If the court documents had actually said reverse merger, yes....we would have been screaming it from the mountain tops, because of the minority tha actuallyt know what a reverse merger is. This is not a difficult concept for most to grasp. Your post seems to avoid the subject that your previous posts contain false information. Anyone that reads the lawsuit filing can see the plaintiffs were not hired to "work on an IPO" (they were not underwriters or lawyers) but rather they were hired as IT consultants/technicians that were hired in that regard as the company prepared for what they assumed was an IPO. Dr. Shiong has never been quoted as saying that an IPO will take place.....rather he substitutes the words in favor for "going public" on EVERY SINGLE OCCASION. We have not seen an S1 filing (and it is May already) nor have we seen any other indications of an IPO that would have been needed by now if the company intends to IPO this year.......and alas we never will. RM coming....SOON. (because his name is Soon Shiong LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL).
Please tell us exactly how the plaintiff's were hired directly to "work on an IPO that is worth an estimated 4 billion dollars". Were the plaintiffs underwriters? Were they attorneys? Publicists? Please tell me the plaintiff's job duties? Your posts constantly state these misrepresentations of facts. The lawsuit never stated the plaintiffs were hired to work ON an IPO directly. The plaintiffs and former employees were actually computer/software techs and were brought on because they had sold their prior company to Nantworks, and their job duties consisted of transferring enormous amounts of Data from the acquired prior company and making sure all systems were in proper working order "as the company prepared for a $4 billion IPO". "Working ON an IPO" and working as computer software technicians "while the company prepares for an IPO" is TWO TOTALLY DIFFERENT OCCUPATIONS. Finally, the statements by the plaintiffs in the lawsuit as it pertains to the company working on an IPO is the plaintiff's own conjecture...not an actual fact, much like the "artcles" your post refers to (ONE ARTICLE, not multiple articles as your posts constantly insinuate) in which it was also the conjecture, or assumption of the editor that an IPO would be taking place. Shiong was never actually quoted in saying as such. Neither the plaintiffs nor the editor of the article are privy to how Nant will "go public" (which has been the only quote by Shiong EVERY TIME he has asked).....NEVER ONCE has Shiong himself stated IPO. Quite peculiar. Thanks for the link BTW.....for those that actually take the time to read the lawsuit filing, they will see the discrepancies in your post.
Boatlife, with all due respect nothing from the 10Q was that scary. Most Biotechs have horrible financials and post some lousy 10Q's before an FDA approval turns it all around. Most times these biotech companies hang between FDA approval and bankruptcy making them all or nothing, no guts no glory plays.
Yeah....the volume was appropriate back at the time for this dead shell too http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=4914306 ROFL.....so that is quite an obvious statement. Most shells are dead until an RM happens.....then comes volume, but by then it's too late for most traders not experienced enough to see what was happening. P.S. That "dead shell" post I provided a link to ran from .10 to over $30 PPS.....
Scared money never made money.....with all shell stocks you have very little to go on many times. With KEYO, we have more to go on than most. Ask any shell player, a shell owned by a billionaire that has never sold it....getting ready to launch a conglomerate of biotech data companies...... it's a no brainer.
FDA approval will make ADMD an immediate potential buyout candidate.....we are in on the bottom floor here. Life changer.
What is the main point of the post? The majority of reverse mergers happen with a private company reverse merging into a non operating shell, or a shell with no going concern business and/or assets. There is nothing "shady" or illegal about this method of going public. SPEA was a perfect example. A non operating shell with no business/assets gets bought by a BILLIONAIRE tv and radio mogul and goes from a PPS of .10 to over $30 per share. Tell the investors who were there for that play that shell stocks are shady LOL. Please familiarize yourself with reverse mergers before posting such info. "Dr Soon is a shady self promoter who has already stripped KEYO assets and moved on to NANT and it's IPO". That is a matter of opinion. I have read materials on what Shiong is doing and many investors are betting on him. Big Investors. Investors whom are not easily tricked by "shady self promotors". Finally, Shiong was KEYO's largest creditor. If Shiong is truly done with KEYO, why has he not sold the shell? In 3 years? One must realize a clean debt free shell can pull in a high 6 figures right? Again, more DD is needed.
"The court doc says PSS hired the plaintiffs to work on the IPO"....No, that's not what it says! The employees that were hired were not underwriters of any sort nor were they hired for the specific purpose of launching an "IPO". The plaintiff's were hired to work on the company's physical product, mostly transferring data from an acquired product to the Nant platform.....this was done in preparation for, or as the company "geared up for an IPO". As time went on, the plaintiff's questioned how the company was going to launch an IPO being so far behind as it pertained to a timeline of product/as related to IPO. Answer....there will be no IPO. These plaintiffs/former employees were told the company was preparing to "go public" and like many who do not know what a reverse merger is or how one works immediately thought "IPO".....thus, that is the language they used in the lawsuit filing. Sometime's one has to learn how to read between the lines. It doesn't just fall in to one's lap.
Is this a good stock? LOL
Beware!!! PPS of KEYO continues to go UP! Bwahahahaha.
This has been explained, how many times now? Much like the Forbes article, this information is second hand. The substantial roles these former employees took on were to work on the company's physical product, transitioning data from Nant's acquired companies products. The plaintiffs were most likely not privy to Nant's actual plans of going public. They are simply using the term IPO in their complaint/lawsuit. If the company files a countersuit and in that countersuit they say the word IPO, then I will believe it. HOWEVER, even with that, it simply means NANT was preparing one entity for an IPO. How many divisions of NANT will there be? And one really is supposed to think it is not possible one of those entities will RM into the KEYO shell? Please! Even billionaires do not just abandon debt free shells worth a book value alone of six figures PLUS the $30M of NOLs! They would at least sell it.....WOW that's right, it's been 3 years and he HAS'NT sold it yet has he? *Lightbulb*
To be clear, the plaintiffs were employed by the company to carry out the product by performing transitions of data to the new infrastructure. The plaintiffs were not helping the company to actually prepare for an IPO as some here with comprehension difficulties suggest. They were instead working on, and readying the company's PRODUCT.....in preparation for what the plaintiff's may have "believed to be" an IPO. I am thinking these two employees were no more privy to the company's actual plans of going public than we are. When most people hear the words "going public" they think "IPO". Many aren't even aware of the other ways to actually go public. This is the reason why Shiong was not going to allow his company to be held hostage. Most of the time, this kind of negative publicity can indeed hurt an IPO's efforts because the IPO has a certain window of time, along with what can be considered volatile PPS fluctuations. An RM is not subject to those fluctuations and allows the company, and it's PPS, to grow on it's own merit. This is why Shiong said "what, me worry"? "Go ahead and sue me....you're not getting a dime"! Conclusion....this particular court document hardly makes an IPO "official". In fact, I think an RM is more in play than ever!
http://www.halterfinancial.com/apo.cfm The deal is, Dr. Shiong was once invested heavily into Keyon Communications (he was their largest creditor). Just months before Keyon Communications filed to go dark, Dr. Shiong converted his debt (some $20M I believe it was) into the control block of preferred shares (over 30M shares) of KEYO making him KEYO's largest shareholder. Of course Dr. Shiong was also reimbursed some .30 on the dollar (from what I've heard) of his total investment in Keyon aside from the preferred shares in KEYO, through liquidated assets. What interests me most is that Shiong made the debt/equity swap a mere matter of months before Keyon Communications went dark. THINK.....obviously Dr. Shiong knew the future for Keyon Communications at that point (15-12g dark filing and liquidation).....and he knew exactly what he would garner from company's liquidated assets. SHIONG WANTED THESE SHARES, AND THE KEYO SHELL, for something. He would not have traded an amount of debt for them otherwise. Shiong has held the KEYO shell for 3 years, when he very well could have sold it along with another shell he sold RPTN (Raptor Networks) years ago. Finally, anyone who tells you that a empty shell "has no value".....as someone stated earlier....doesn't know what they are talking about, period. Clean, debt free shells like KEYO can sell for 100's of thousands of dollars. A good reverse merger starts by using a shell with 0 assets and 0 liabilities. When a company of value reverse merges into the shell, the PPS can skyrocket gaining investors thousands of percents on their money. This is why many stock traders seek out reverse merger plays specifically, and there are several boards on IHUB dedicated to reverse mergers. Coming across a shell owned by a BILLIONAIRE doctor.....is the kind of rare occurance dreams are made of.
Actually, not that funny. A court doc or an article can state IPO without going into details of what kind of IPO it is. We are just arguing semantics now. Reverse IPO/Reverse Merger/APO/RTM all cut from the same cloth and can be labeled as all of the above. This is why Forbes can not be sued for stating IPO....even though Dr Shiong NEVER SAID IT. "Gearing up for IPO"... "Time is of the essence" with an IPO...."We are at least one year behind"....all of these should have been clues for the clueless. Where is that S1? I'm still not seeing it ANYWHERE.
Great post! Agree 1000%!
Hope all is well Jersey.....looking forward to a conclusion here in 2015.
Thnx jimmy I appreciate it....
"He already said IPO numerous times. If it was insider trading to say RM then it would be to say he was doing an IPO". I am not going to address the statement that Shiong has said IPO numerous times. That statement is simply false. I am going to reply to this post for the benefit of those who may be totally new to trading and may not know the difference as it pertains to the repercussions of announcing an RM prior to, as opposed to announcing an IPO ahead of time (as many companies do often). Understand, when an IPO takes place, everyone has an equal opportunity to purchase shares on the given date of the IPO. This is why announcing an IPO prior to the launch date is perfectly legal. No one has any inside advantage over another. If a CEO was to announce that they were planning on doing a reverse merger prior to.....this is considered inside trading knowledge because only those who read an article, or listened to a particular interview would have an advantage of knowing a reverse merger was going to take place. Most likely, those individuals would then dig for information to see what shells the CEO might be connected to and discover that shell is actively trading and then they buy before other investors who aren't "in the know"... That is trading on insider knowledge. This is why Shiong has never stated RM (nor has he actually been quoted as saying IPO). Hope this gives some knowledge to any newbies on board who have not done any DD as of yet. Next time I will cover the process of the APO/RM/RTM LOL and how they are all components of the SAME THING and not totally different scenarios. DD is a great thing! Try it today!
As always, we wait....and watch. Then possibly wait some more LOL. Hopefully the wait will have been worth it. GLTY
Segregated non-interest bearing bank account. http://www.thefreedictionary.com/segregated set apart from each other; isolate or divide. Divided in facilities or administered separately. Is JPM our key to payment? "CT's are not apart of the bankruptcy".
"JPM is not a trustee for the CT's". http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/806085/000104746905000357/a2149684z424b2.htm The trust's business and affairs are conducted by it's trustees, which are J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, N.A. (as successor to Chase Manhattan Bank), as property trustee, The prospectus also clearly states that JPM is not only the property trustee, but also a trustee under the guarantee as well. If JPM is holding onto monies earmarked for CT holders, could they pay us? The prospectus states, The property trustee will hold title to the subordinated indentures for the benefit of the holders of the preferred securities and, as the holders of subordinated indentures, the property trustee will have power to exercise all rights, powers and priveleges of a holder of subordinated indentures under the subordinated indenture. In addition the property trustee will maintain exclusive control of a segregated non-interest bearing bank account to hold all payments in respect of subordinated debentures for the benefit of the holders of the preferred securities.
What an INGENIOUS idea! I will ask Shiong if he plans on doing a reverse merger, perhaps the next time we meet up for Sushi. Hopefully I can get Shiong to "fess up" and admit he is doing a reverse merger so I can really load up. Then....after Shiong does the reverse merger, we can both spend hours with the SEC talking "insider trading knowledge" and perhaps share a cell together. I will tell the SEC that "it seemed like a simple enough question" LMAO. P.S KEYO never traded at .0002